Ford is having a bad year in 2018. Its stock is down 29%, and the tariffs imposed by President Trump have reportedly cost the company $1 billion, as the company is in the midst of a reorganization. Now, the company is announcing layoffs.

Jim Hackett, Ford’s CEO, is working to engineer a $25.5 billion restructuring of the automaker, hoping to cut costs and remain competitive, the Wall Street Journal reports. But auto sales are down, and one reason is the trade tariffs that Trump has imposed on metals and other goods. According to Bloomberg, Hackett has said they have already cost the company $1 billion in profit and could do “more damage” if the disputes aren’t resolved quickly.

Ford, the No. 2 U.S. automaker by sales, is making aggressive job cuts as part of that reorganization, NBC News reported. While the company hasn’t said how many jobs will be lost, a report from Morgan Stanley estimates “a global headcount reduction of approximately 12 percent,” or 24,000 of Ford’s 202,000 workers worldwide.”

Key part to take away. Ford is turning away from sedans to focus on trucks. The only car they are retaining is the Mustang. In the top 5 selling Ford vehicles in 2017 the Fusion and the Focus were in the number 4 and 5 spot. So, let's look at that again. Of their top 5 selling vehicles they cut two of them.
Foreign sedans are simply kicking their ass. All they have are trucks and SUVs.

Key part to take away. Ford is turning away from sedans to focus on trucks. The only car they are retaining is the Mustang. In the top 5 selling Ford vehicles in 2017 the Fusion and the Focus were in the number 4 and 5 spot. So, let's look at that again. Of their top 5 selling vehicles they cut two of them.
Foreign sedans are simply kicking their ass. All they have are trucks and SUVs.

Indeed.

Plus things in Carolina are pretty good so tariffs must topple economic axioms.

“The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” --George Orwell

Originally Posted by AuH20

In terms of a full spectrum candidate, Rand is leaps and bounds above Trump. I'm not disputing that.

Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?--Donald Trump

Plus things in Carolina are pretty good so tariffs must topple economic axioms.

Does my posting on the current substantial uptick in employment in my sector of the country offend your sensibilities? The whole article reads like a bad joke that won't even get a guffaw in a loony bin.

Except as to the rule of appointment, the United States have an indefinite discretion to make requisitions for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America.

Ford cuts shifts at factories in Kentucky and Michigan, but keeps jobs

Ford cutting a shift at Louisville Assembly Plant and Flat Rock Assembly Plant.
It is not making any job cuts.
Ford is cutting a shift at two of its plants, but the automaker's avoiding layoffs by moving workers to other facilities, the company said Wednesday.

The automaker is shifting about 500 workers from its Louisville Assembly plant to its Kentucky Truck Plant — both in Kentucky — to increase production of the Ford Expedition and Lincoln Navigator, which are both experiencing strong sales.

It will also move 500 jobs from its Flat Rock Assembly Plant to its Livonia Transmission plant, which makes transmissions for several vehicles, including its F-150 full-size pickup and the Ranger, a mid-size pickup Ford is reintroducing after 8 years. Both plants are in Michigan.

Ford makes the Ford Escape and the Lincoln MKC, both compact crossover vehicles, at the Louisvile Assembly plant, and the Mustang sports car at Flat Rock.

Higher demand for pricey pickups and SUVs, have helped automakers, particularly American ones, weather falling sales this year. Ford is especially strong in larger pickups and SUVs. Ford Expedition sales in October increased 36 percent from one year ago, while Lincoln Navigator rose more than 80 percent over the same month in 2017. At the same time, sales of the Escape fell 7 percent, the MKC 8.5 percent, and the Mustang 6 percent.

"Our collectively bargained contract provides for the placement of all members displaced by the shift reduction and, after working with Ford, we are confident that all impacted employees will have the opportunity to work at nearby facilities," said United Auto Workers Union vice president Rory Gamble.

Ford executives haven't offered details on the layoffs because they don't have them yet, several Ford officials have told The Detroit News. The automaker is aiming to flatten management globally based on feedback from individual department leaders. The company expects to have specifics on a headcount reduction by the second quarter of 2019.

I was listening to an investors conference call related to metals and the CEO was laughing about Fords claim that they lost the billion due to tariffs, since they haven't paid a single dollar more due to tariffs yet as the prices are set at least a year in advance. they might NEXT year, but not this year.

"Let it not be said that we did nothing." - Dr. Ron Paul. "Stand up for what you believe in, even if you are standing alone." - Sophie Magdalena Scholl
"War is the health of the State." - Randolph Bourne "Freedom is the answer. ... Now, what's the question?" - Ernie Hancock.

GM’s announcement the other day that it will no longer make cars – or rather, just a few – follows Ford’s previous announcement along the same lines.

Chevy will lose more than half of its currently available passenger car models, including the full-size Impala sedan, the mid-size Cruze and the compact Sonic. Plus the functionally viable Volt electric car, which gets the noose for probably just that reason (separate rant; see here for more about that).

Ford has already shed its entire Mercury division and GM its Oldsmobile, Pontiac and Saturn divisions.

More will inevitably follow.

Because how many different ways can GM re-sell the same relative handful of closely related crossovers and trucks? And how long will GM (or anyone else) be able to sell trucks and SUVs at all, given the anvil descending of a mandatory minimum 50 MPG federal fatwa?

Cadillac, GM’s luxury division, is probably living on borrowed time.

Its cars were different from Chevy and Buick’s cars because Cadillac’s cars – models like the ATS and CT6 – were almost all based on a rear-drive layout, while almost everything sold by the lesser divisions – excepting specialty cars like the Camaro and Corvette, which survive, for now – was built on a FWD layout.

But GM is kiboshing the ATS and CT6 and possibly the not-yet-here (and may never get here) 2019 CT8 sedan.

If these go away, Cadillac is left with its re-badged and heavily upsold Chevy Tahoe – aka, the “Cadillac” Escalade – and rebadged/upsold GMC Acadias (the “Cadillac” XT5) and rebadged/upsold GMC Terrains (“Cadillac” XT4) which are also rebadged Chevy Equinoxes.

Given the Chevy and GMC progenitors of these “Cadillacs” offer almost everything you can get in the Cadillac-badged versions – but for a lot less money – why bother with the Cadillac versions?

This is a general problem, not just Cadillac’s.

There is much less in the way of meaningful distinction between the “entry level” car and the “entry luxury” car and the “luxury car” than there once was. Try finding any car without AC and power windows – or even an LCD touchscreen, for that matter. The differences which used to exist between a Chevette and a Sedan deVille no longer do.

One of the few points of departure still extant is rear-drive vs. front-drive layouts, the latter being historically (and currently) associated with lower-tier cars while the former has long been the defining characteristic of something a cut-above.

And now Cadillac won’t have that, or not much of that.

Has Mary Barra thought about this? Or is it part of the plan?

To slow-motion euthanize Cadillac?

Ford is walking the same Green Mile. It will sell the same crossover-ish thing in three different sizes, small medium and large – but at least under the same label.

Chrysler has almost nothing left to sell. One minivan and one car, the venerable 300 sedan. Fiat – the owner of what remains of Chrysler – has not committed to new anything for Chrysler, which slowly twists in the wind.

Dodge – also owned by Fiat – hasn’t had a new model in years. It has had models – trucks – ripped from its model lineup, to be “spun off” as a separate brand (Ram trucks) which is as ominous an indicator of Dodge’s future as black spots on an x-ray of your lungs.

Every car company, just about, has committed to building several electric cars, at the least. Some – like Volvo – to building only electrified cars. But without something different under the hood – electric motors and batteries being pretty much the same, other than some being larger, others smaller – why even bother with these brands?

Especially brands like Porsche – which is among the EV beguiled. A silent (and shiftless, electric motors are one speed) Porsche is like a 2×4 among the stacks of them at Home Depot. Would you pay four times as much for the 2×4 that has “Porsche” stamped on it?

A great winnowing – and consolidation – is under way.

Cars are becoming interchangeable modules – and one only needs so many versions of the same thing. Red or white or blue? A larger – or smaller – touchscreen?

This homogenization of transportation may not be deliberate – it’s mostly the result of decades of government mandates, which have had the effect of imposing a general sameness on vehicle design – but it serves a definite purpose:

It detaches people emotionally from cars – and from driving.

What does it matter if the bus you’re boarding is yellow or silver? Or has 30 seats rather than 40? Do you pay much attention to the taxi you just climbed into? Most people log onto Facebook or otherwise bury themselves in gadgetry as soon as they sit down.

Cars are becoming places where you sit for awhile.

And this is probably exactly what GM – and Ford – ultimately have in mind. This isn’t even a wild-eyed supposition. They have said so – openly. GM’s announcement earlier this week about the mass die-off of its passenger car lineup was accompanied by soothsaying about the company’s “transition(s) to self-driving electric” cars.

Which gives the lie to the odd prattle about “focusing on trucks and SUVs,” the fatuity eructed by Mary Barra and her amen chorus when the death knell tolled. How, exactly, will GM “focus” on such vehicles when the 50 MPG CAFE fatwa goes into effect come 2025? And what is Barra up to, given she has to know that not a single truck or SUV GM makes – or can make and still qualify as a truck or SUV – rates anything close to 50 MPG?

They’re rioting in France over the government’s imposition of artificial fuel scarcity.

There’s no actual shortage; the country – the world – is swimming in fuel, courtesy of new discoveries and new extraction techniques.

Parisians just can’t afford to buy it because of French President Emmanuel Macron’s “hydrocarbon tax” regime – specifically designed to make fuel unaffordable, as a compensatory measure to correct for its abundance and the low prices that would otherwise be the case.

As here.

Adjusted for inflation, the cost of gasoline is less in real terms than it was in 1965. And a huge chunk of the cost today is taxes – about 50 cents per gallon. Take that away and gas would only cost about $2 per gallon.

Diesel fuel – despite the add-on costs of having to refine it to the nth degree in order to achieve compliance with federal Ultra Low Sulfur fatwas – is also very affordable, about $2.60 per gallon.

This, of course, is a big problem for the getting-people-out-of-their-cars agenda. Of which Macron (the Beto O’ Rourke of the French) is a leading avatar.

Which agenda had pinned its hopes on the perception of naturally rising fuel prices (also artificially created, via the withholding of oil) as the nudge they needed to get people to give up their cars voluntarily.

But the Peak Oil that’s been promised – threatened – for more than half a century never peaked.

Worse – from the standpoint of those who want to get-us-out-of-cars – is that the opposite has happened. More oil has been found. Oceans of the stuff. So much oil has been discovered that despite a more than doubling of worldwide demand, supply has increased even faster.

This has eliminated the excuse for all the government-imposed austerity measures of the past 50 years – everything from the “Drive 55” water torture we endured from the mid-1970s until the mid-1990s to the Corporate Average Fuel Economy fatwas that are literally destroying the car industry.

And the disappearance of that excuse is an obsidian dagger pointed at the heart of the Electric Car Agenda, which is really an anti-car, anti-mobility agenda. The object is to get people out of their cars. To get them under control. EVs are just the shuck-and-jive used to gull the modern-day version of Lenin’s useful idiots.

Bottom line: If fuel is plentiful then there is no reason for “alternatives” to it.

At least, no reason for most people to freely give up their affordable, quick-to-refuel and long-ranged non-electric cars in favor of expensive, takes-forever-to-recharge and range-gimped EVs.

And this is the reason for the hysteria we’re witnessing – from governments like Macron’s as well as ours – attended by the courtier press, which sings the “climate change” chorus at top volume, to drown out the problem of cheap, abundant fuel.

And for Macron’s “hydrocarbon tax.”

It has caused the price per liter of diesel fuel in France to swell by almost 25 percent over by the past year, to about $7 per gallon as of late November. This is a very big deal in France because more than half the passenger cars on the road are diesel-powered.

They became so popular because of artificially rising gas prices. The French government, like other European governments, has been imposing haltingly regressive taxes on gas for decades.

A diesel-powered car goes farther on a liter of fuel than an equivalent gas-burning car. Buying a diesel-powered car was thus an end run around government-manufactured unleaded regular austerity.

Now, it’s diesel that’s in the crosshairs – precisely because it is abundant, efficient and affordable.

And it’s not just the fuel, either.

The French government has issued decrees forbidding diesel-powered cars made in 2005 or before from entering Paris and will progressively increase these bans until diesel-powered cars are outlawed altogether.

This, of course, renders those cars – several hundred thousand of them – useless to their owners, who will not be compensated for the regulatory taking. Instead, they will be nudged to become parasitical upon their fellow Frenchmen, by partaking of subsidies for . . . electric cars.

Until, of course, those become the object of future bans. Which, rest assured, they will be. Remember: The real issue is mobility. Limiting, controlling and denying it – to average people.

Never, of course, to the elites. Macron will have all the diesel and gas he likes. Paid for by those who can no longer afford it themselves.

And there’s more.

All IC powered cars (diesel and gas) will be prohibited from operating in the French capital beginning in 2030 and a ban on their sale in the whole country goes into effect in 2040. Similar measures are either in process or already on the books in other European countries, including the UK and Germany.

And this is why there is such unglued hysteria – displayed by the car companies and the government – for electric cars here, too.

Major automakers headquartered in Europe such as Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Volvo, Renault, VW/Audi, Jaguar/Land Rover and Alfa have had their businesses shut down by regulatory edict.

They will go electric – or they will not go at all.

And because of that, so will we.

Even if Uncle doesn’t impose no-driving/no IC fatwas and/or confiscatory fuel taxes, the rip-tide effect of what is going on right now in Europe will almost certainly drag us along.

Consider: Half of the world’s major car companies have “committed” – that is, been forced to accept – an all-electric future because of what is going on in Europe. They aren’t going to continue investing R&D money into the development of a separate line of non-electric cars, even if they are still allowed to sell them here. So they will sell electric cars here and – having embraced the tar baby – push for mandates that they be sold and for subsidies to help sell them.

GM and Ford will do so also – have already committed publicly to the same agenda. In part because they can’t afford to not sell cars in Europe, which are huge markets for them both.